Rights management and enforcement is highly desirable in connection with digital content such as a digital application or the like, where such digital application is to be distributed to one or more users. Typical modes of distribution include tangible devices such as a magnetic (floppy) disk, a magnetic tape, an optical (compact) disk (CD), etc., and intangible media such as an electronic bulletin board, an electronic network, the Internet, etc. Upon being received by the user on a computing device thereof, such user can activate the application with the aid of an appropriate operating system on the computing device.
Typically, an author and/or publisher of the application wishes to distribute such application to each of many users or recipients in exchange for a license fee or some other consideration. In such scenario, then, the application may be a word processing application, a spreadsheet application, a browser application, a gaming application, a media player application, a combination thereof, and the like. Such author/publisher or other similar entity (hereinafter, “publisher”), given the choice, would likely wish to restrict what each user can do with such published application. For example, the publisher would like to restrict the user from copying and re-distributing such application to a second user, at least in a manner that denies the publisher a license fee from such second user.
However, after publication has occurred, such publisher has very little if any real control over the application. This is especially problematic in view of the fact that practically every personal computer includes the software and hardware necessary to make an exact digital copy of such application, and to download such exact digital copy to a write-able magnetic or optical disk, or to send such exact digital copy over a network such as the Internet to any destination.
Of course, as part of a transaction wherein the application is distributed, the publisher may require the user/recipient of the application to promise not to re-distribute such application in an unwelcome manner. However, such a promise is easily made and easily broken. A publisher may attempt to prevent such re-distribution through any of several known security devices, usually involving encryption and decryption. However, there is likely very little that prevents a mildly determined user from decrypting an encrypted application, saving such application in an un-encrypted form, and then re-distributing same.
In addition, the publisher may wish to provide the user with the flexibility to purchase different types or editions of the application. For example, the publisher may wish to provide a full-featured edition at a higher price and a rudimentary edition at a lower price. Likewise, the publisher may wish to offer a business edition and a home edition, a student edition and a teacher edition, or the like. Note, though, that in the prior art, each such edition of the application would require that the publisher distribute a separate set of operating code. Thus, and as should be appreciated, offering multiple editions of the same application requires that a publisher maintain, package, and sell each such edition separately, with considerable expense. Moreover, each such edition likely is supported separately, updated separately, and debugged separately, with even more considerable expense. Also, when errors or bugs in the application are found, each such edition likely must be separately reviewed and corrected, if in fact the error exists in all such editions, once again with considerable expense.
To provide the user with the flexibility to purchase different editions of an application, a publisher may offer different types of use licenses at different license fees, while at the same time holding the user to the terms of whatever type of license is in fact purchased. For example, and in the case where the application includes multiple available features, the publisher may wish to offer a user menus of such available features/editions to be licensed, or even allow a user to select particular ones of the available features to be licensed. Thus, the user in purchasing such a license would be able to employ the available features of the application that are enabled by the license, and would be restricted from employing the available features of the application that are not enabled by the license. Presumably, fees for licenses would vary based on the available features enabled thereby.
Significantly, by offering multiple types of licenses for the application or by offering customized licenses for the application, the publisher can avoid having to distribute multiple distinct editions of the application, each tailored to a particular set of available features. Instead, the publisher need only distribute a single base copy of the application with all available features, and then provide a license that enables only a certain subset of all such available features. As may be appreciated, if the single base copy of the application is distributed in a form such that the application is inoperable without a valid license, such application may be freely distributed and re-distributed, yet may only be operated by a user if such user obtains a license from the publisher or an agent thereof.
Rights Management (RM) and enforcement architectures and methods have previously been provided to allow the controlled operation of arbitrary forms of digital applications, where such control is flexible and definable by the publisher of such application. Typically, a digital license is provided to operate the application, where the application cannot be actuated in a meaningful manner without such license. For example, it may be the case that at least a portion of the application is encrypted and the license includes a decryption key for decrypting such encrypted portion. In addition, it may be the case that the license is tied to a user or a computing device thereof, and such computing device includes a security feature that ensures that the terms of the license are honored.
However, such RM architectures have not heretofore been employed to effectuate a licensing architecture where only one copy of a digital application need be released with multiple available features or editions such that a particular license issued to a particular user specifies which available features/edition may be employed by the user. Accordingly, a need exists for such a licensing architecture, whereby a publisher of an application need not release multiple editions of the same application, and a user in obtaining a license can select which of the multiple available features/editions are to be licensed.